The Professor opens a can of whup-ass
Last week, I marveled (albeit in an oblique way) that the Wilsons had managed to survive this whole affair with their reputations and careers largely intact (or partially intact in Joe's case, I guess.) Glenn Reynolds is more to the point.
Either way, it seems to me that everyone involved with planning the Wilson mission should be fired.
He explains why, in uncharacteristically harsh (but entirely appropriate) language.
Assuming that Valerie Plame was some sort of genuinely covert operative -- something that's not actually quite clear from the indictment -- the chain of events looks pretty damning: Wilson was sent to Africa on an investigative mission regarding nuclear weapons, but never asked to sign any sort of secrecy agreement(!). Wilson returns, reports, then publishes an oped in the New York Times (!!) about his mission. This pretty much ensures that people will start asking why he was sent, which leads to the fact that his wife arranged it. Once Wilson's oped appeared, Plame's covert status was in serious danger. Yet nobody seemed to care.This leaves two possibilities. One is that the mission was intended to result in the New York Times oped all along, meaning that the CIA didn't care much about Plame's status, and was trying to meddle in domestic politics. This reflects very badly on the CIA.
The other possibility is that they're so clueless that they did this without any nefarious plan, because they're so inept, and so prone to cronyism and nepotism, that this is just business as usual. If so, the popular theory that the CIA couldn't find its own weenie with both hands and a flashlight would appear to have found some pretty strong support.
Ouch. I don't know what the professor is drinking tonight, but I'm happy to buy him another round.
Comments
Again, a conservative moron fresh from Rush Limbaugh 101 suggests that perhaps Valerie Plame wasn't *really* working undercover for the CIA.
I wonder why it is that her decades long neighbors, with whom she socialized and had countless dinner parties, had NO IDEA she worked for the CIA.
Instead of just admitting that Conservatives are traitors who hate America and will do *anything* to stay in power so that they can steal through multi-billion dollar no-bid contracts and price gouging at the gas pump (don't you just wonder who is going to bankroll the Republican smear campaigns in the next elections!) -- instead of making these simple and obvious admissions, they contort around the plain truth and insinuate that Valerie Plame lived quite openly as a CIA agent.
This is what happens to your mind when you listen to a fat felon drug addict like Rush Limbaugh, who snorted so much Hillbilly Heroine that he actually went deaf (a known and common side effect). Then he even lied about that to his entire audience, claiming that it was congenital. It was about as congenital as the ass boil he used to hide from military service, just like the other Chickenhawks: Bush, Cheney, and on and on.
Posted by: Bailey Hankins | November 1, 2005 10:28 AM
Again, a conservative moron fresh from Rush Limbaugh 101 suggests that perhaps Valerie Plame wasn't *really* working undercover for the CIA.
I wonder why it is that her decades long neighbors, with whom she socialized and had countless dinner parties, had NO IDEA she worked for the CIA.
Instead of just admitting that Conservatives are traitors who hate America and will do *anything* to stay in power so that they can steal through multi-billion dollar no-bid contracts and price gouging at the gas pump (don't you just wonder who is going to bankroll the Republican smear campaigns in the next elections!) -- instead of making these simple and obvious admissions, they contort around the plain truth and insinuate that Valerie Plame lived quite openly as a CIA agent.
This is what happens to your mind when you listen to a fat felon drug addict like Rush Limbaugh, who snorted so much Hillbilly Heroine that he actually went deaf (a known and common side effect). Then he even lied about that to his entire audience, claiming that it was congenital. It was about as congenital as the ass boil he used to hide from military service, just like the other Chickenhawks: Bush, Cheney, and on and on.
Posted by: Bailey Hankins | November 1, 2005 10:28 AM
Your "conservative moron fresh from Rush Limbaugh 101" is a tenured professor of constitutional law. Just thought you'd like to know. Not only that, but his post simply doesn't imply what you claim it does. And what any of it has to do with Mr. Limbaugh and his substance abuse escapes me, frankly.
Posted by: Barry | November 1, 2005 10:36 AM
The neo-cons have already established that tenured university professors are all a bunch of dangerously deranged perverts poisoning the minds of our children. Or wait, does that only apply to liberal professors?
If your credentials are so great, why do you use Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity as sources of information?
Valerie Plame was quite clearly undercover, and the Bush White House contains at the very least one traitor who put her at risk to exact revenge on a critic. For this, they should be taken out and shot.
Instead, they have you, a apologist, attacking the victim. Maybe you have a little dirt on Valerie Plame's sex life too? Was she a dirty little whore too? She wanted to be outed, didn't she!
Posted by: Bailey Hankins | November 1, 2005 10:41 AM
> why do you use Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity as sources of information?
I don't. Why do you make unwarranted assumptions about me?
Posted by: Barry | November 1, 2005 10:50 AM
What is assumptive about noting that you repeat the common lies being spread by those two morons?
Was Valerie Plame covert? If not, why did she hide her employment at the CIA from her closest friends?
What about Joe Wilson -- was he in any way qualified for his mission? Um ... yes, very much so. Did Valerie Plame assign him to the mission? No.
In your mind, the CIA is conspiring against poor little Bush and his befuddled band of muddled munchkins -- hmmm, what did Dubya's daddy do before he became Veep ... hmmm.
Posted by: Bailey Hankins | November 1, 2005 11:21 AM
Fitzgerald himself announced that Plame "was classified but not covert."
Neither the Espionage Act, nor the Intelligence Identities Protection Act (IIPA) were violated, that's why the only thing Libby is charged with is perjury, NOT "outing" a covert agent.
In fact, Libby's lies were about every other journalist EXCEPT Mike Novak, who leaked the story.
Moreover, Novak, himself vehemently opposed to the Iraq war, was purportedly angry over what he saw as the "cronyism appointment" of Joe Wilson.
And the funny thing is, that Wilson himself says that his report never debunked the "Iraq seeking to buy Yellow Cake from Niger" story. His report said that Niger's only two exports are Uranium and goats and that it's unlikely that Iraq was seeking to purchase goats. Beyond that, Wilson's was one of three reports on Niger & Iraq, none of which came to the conclusion that the "Yellow Cake" story was bogus.
Posted by: JMK | November 1, 2005 04:00 PM
Did Fitzgerald say that these Acts were not violated, or did he say that the White House lies and obstructs justice to such a degree than he cannot indict anyone yet? I never heard him exonerate anyone.
Ah, next you pull out the old "but Saddam really WAS trying to buy uranium!"
Bush lied. They all lied. The knowingly lied. They knew that what they were saying was a lie. The intelligence they based their lies on was known, by them, to not conclude what they lied and said it did conclude.
Bush & Co. are liars.
I am absolutely sure that an a-hole like Saddam was trying to get his hands on uranium and every other form of WMD on the planet. I wish he had been shot to death like his two rapist sons. That doesn't excuse Bush lying because he can't wait to enrich his friends, which he has amply done!
Every gallon of gas sold in the U.S. now has what I like to call a $1.00 a gallon Bush Tax. What happened to Iraq paying for this war? The U.S. taxpayer paid for the war, for Halliburton's theft and record profits, and for Big Oil's gouging and record profits.
No matter how many apologists the Republicans trot out, they are SCREWED. People vote their pocketbook, and thanks to Bush, unless you are in the top 1% bracket like me, your pocketbook is feeling a lot lighter than it used to.
Posted by: Bailey Hankins | November 1, 2005 05:36 PM
> Ah, next you pull out the old "but Saddam really WAS trying to buy uranium!"
Well, yeah, I will.
In Bush's infamous SOTU address, he said that British intelligence had determined that Saddam sought yellowcake, not the CIA. To this date, British intelligence has not repudiated that claim.
More importantly, Joe Wilson's own report from his Niger junket (as opposed to his op-ed piece for the NYT) seems to imply that Saddam did indeed approach Niger regarding yellowcake purchases.
Posted by: Barry | November 1, 2005 05:48 PM
Yes, Barry's right. British Intelligence still stands by their Iraq in Niger story and to date, none of the reports (INCLUDING Wilson's) ever debunked that Intel.
Thankfully Porter Goss is putting the failed CIA back on track. They failed to provide adequate Intelligence pre-9/11 and they apparently failed over Iraq and WMDs, though NOT on Iraq's well known links to international terrorism, including its long term relations with al Qaeda, including Baghdad's supporting the al Qaeda run Ansar al Islam camps in their joint struggle against the Iraqi Kurds.
Posted by: JMK | November 3, 2005 12:33 PM